Party Affiliation of the Now-Deceased Bruce Ivins, as Confirmed by His Local County Board of Elections, Adds Yet Another Curious Question to the Increasingly Troubling Investigation into the Post-9/11 Terrorist Attacks on American Soil...

Bruce E. Ivins, reportedly on the verge of being indicted for capital murder in the anthrax killings, was a registered Democrat, according to the Fredrick County, MD, Board of Elections. He had been registered there since 1982 and records indicate that he voted in "every election since 1996," including Democratic primaries, according to the official who responded to a request from West Virginia-based radio host Bob Kincaid.

The party affiliation of the bio-terror researcher who worked at U.S. Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Disease (USAMRIID) adds a notable twist to the ever increasing questions surrounding the bizarre case following Ivins' reported suicide last week. He was, according to media reports, soon to be indicted for charges related to the post-9/11 terror attacks that rocked the nation and, as Salon'sGlen Greenwald has very effectively argued, served as a crucial influence in marching the country towards war with Iraq.

Last week, as the story of Ivins' reported suicide was breaking, The BRAD BLOG excoriated the corporate mainstream media for failing to note that the targets of the multiple post-9/11 terror attacks on American soil were primarily powerful men, perceived as "liberals" by the Republican right wing. Nonetheless, despite two senior Democratic U.S. senators, Tom Daschle of SD and Patrick Leahy of VT, having been the only known governmental targets in the deadly letter campaign which also included perceived "liberal" media figurehead Tom Brokaw, the MSM coverage --- almost uniformly --- failed to note the obvious correlations in the attacks. Most even failed to even mention the names of those who were directly targeted in what was clearly meant to appear as a follow-up attack from Muslim extremists.

Furthermore, as we also noted on Friday, despite a parade of reporters who had contacted Ivins' oldest brother Thomas that day for comment, not one of them --- until us --- bothered even to inquire about Bruce's political leanings or affiliations.

That it now turns out Ivins was a registered Democrat adds yet another curious twist to a story which is already revealing bizarre and potentially exculpatory evidence and other cracks in the government's reported (though, as yet, not publicly disclosed) case against him. Today, the New York Times noted, as we similarly did yesterday, that the FBI's case against Ivins appears to be almost entirely circumstantial, at least based on the information so far available...

As the Times, The BRAD BLOG, and many others have now noted, the case appears to hinge largely on the testimony of a social worker, Jean C. Duley, who had treated Ivins for a number of months in group therapy. As it turns out, however, Duley herself has a criminal history (as detailed by both Larisa Alexandrovna and Greenwald) and is no longer working at the Fredrick, MD, facility where Ivins was being treated, according to Bloomberg News.

A physician, bio-terror specialist, and former colleague of Ivins, Meryl Nass raised significant questions about the veracity of Duley's testimony against Ivins on her blog devoted to the topic.

Further, the Washington Post noted on Friday (before they scrubbed the story from their website, but then re-asserted the charges on Sunday) that colleagues of Ivins and other experts felt Ivins couldn't have carried out the attacks, as "he had no access to dry, powdered anthrax" of the type used in the attacks at the Army lab in MD where he worked.

While it was too late to reach anyone for confirmation at the Frederick County, MD, Board of Elections, our source for this report, Bob Kincaid, creator and host of the progressive Head-On Radio Network, has been a long-time trusted friend of The BRAD BLOG. He detailed the information he gathered and how he gathered it.

[ED NOTE 5/8/08 1:45pm PT: We have since confirmed the information ourselves with the Frederick County Board of Elections. See the update at the end of this article for details.]

After he informed us of his findings late this afternoon, we asked if he had documents from the BoE to support the claim that Ivins was a Democrat.

He replied, via email, that he had no physical documentation, at this time, since "The nature of Maryland law was such that I had to provide them with a written request for info, signed by yrs trly."

He "complied by e-mailing a scan of a signed request letter" and was told that he could either wait for the information in response to his request to be sent via the U.S. mail or he could be notified by phone. "They...informed me that the Board isn't allowed to e-mail such info in response" to such requests, Kincaid wrote and later confirmed when we chatted about the matter later on the phone, and on his radio program late this afternoon. (The MP3 of that interview is now posted as an update at the bottom of this article.)

"I didn't want to wait for the snail mail, so I requested they let me know by phone," Kincaid told us during the follow-up call.

"I asked for Bruce Ivins," he explained while detailing his call to the BoE. "I spelled the name, and they were well familiar with who I was talking about. I can't imagine that there could be many other Bruce Ivins in Frederick, Maryland."

The BRAD BLOG has reviewed the signed request that Kincaid says he sent to Stuart Harvey, Supervisor of the BoE, in which Kincaid noted that "Any response [to the request] may be made telephonically to the number above or to [his email address]. Inasmuch as this is information for a story on deadline, there is no need to mail the response."

"The purpose of this correspondence is to provide you with a written request," Kincaid wrote to Harvey, "pursuant to Maryland law as you expressed it to me, for all public voter registration information for an individual by the name of Bruce Ivins, included, but not limited to name, address of registration, party affiliation and elections/primaries in which the registrant has voted."

Kincaid was later called back by a deputy to the Supervisor of the Fredrick County BoE and informed that Ivins had been a registered Democrat and had voted in every election since 1996. The pertinent part of the initial email from Kincaid follows:

The nature of Maryland law was such that I had to provide them with a written request for info, signed by yrs trly. I complied by e-mailing a scan of a signed request letter.

They then informed me that the Board isn't allowed to e-mail such info in response. She instead conveyed the information by phone, said info being received by my lovely wife, Agnes. That information via Noreen, the deputy to Stuart Harvey, Supervisor of the Frederick County, Maryland Board of Elections, is as follows: Bruce Ivins, Date of Registration 24 November 1982. Party of Registration: Democrat. Records indicate he voted in every election since 1996.

Kincaid confirmed again, on the air today, that his understanding was that Ivins had voted in every Democratic Primary election in Frederick County since '96, since Maryland has a "closed" primary system, allowing only members of each political party to vote in their own primaries. "So it wasn't an Operation Chaos type of thing," Kincaid explained on the air, referring to rightwing radio host Rush Limbaugh's campaign to encourage Republicans to vote for Hillary Clinton in this year's Democratic Primary contests.

Little otherwise seems to be known so far about Ivins' political affiliation and little has been reported on what would seem to be a crucial element in the case. The toxic letters sent to the Democratic senators were written so as to have appeared to be from a Muslim extremist, and were used to further the Administration's early allegations that the 9/11 attacks were from similar entities.

Ivins was known to have been a practicing Roman Catholic and a regular attendee of his local parish, according to a number of media accounts. He had sent Letters to the Editor of his local paper, the Frederick News-Post, over the years. The paper printed several of them.

Greenwald reported on the cryptic clues, perhaps revealed by those letters, regarding Ivins' ideology. The letters, which seem to indicate, contrary to his party registration, that he leaned politically rightward, were excerpted by Greenwald on Friday as follows:

Though the underlying ideology is a bit difficult to discern, he seems clearly driven by a belief in the need for Christian doctrine to govern our laws and political institutions, with a particular interest in Catholic dogma. He wrote things like this:

Today we frequently admonish people who oppose abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide or capital punishment to keep their religious, moral, and philosophical beliefs to themselves.

Before dispensing such admonishments in the future, perhaps we should gratefully consider some of our country's most courageous, historical figures who refused to do so.

And then there's this rather cryptic message, published in 2006:

Rabbi Morris Kosman is entirely correct in summarily rejecting the demands of the Frederick Imam for a "dialogue."

By blood and faith, Jews are God's chosen, and have no need for "dialogue" with any gentile. End of "dialogue."

A full reading of the first letter excerpted above by Greenwald, however, reveals that Ivins was speaking up for early religious leaders, such as Quakers, who believed "slavery was a sin". He goes on, in the same letter then, to laud American "ministers, rabbis and priests whose beliefs brought them to the forefront in the battle against forced, racial segregation in America."

Other letters from Ivins to the News-Post exhibited still more signs of Progressivism, as late as this 2004 letter to the paper:

Readers of The Frederick News-Post were recently informed via letter to the editor ("Gay marriage not supportable," Dec. 26), that "the newest studies indicate that you are not born gay."

I'm a scientist, as well as a married heterosexual, and I'd be very interested in learning what those "newest studies" are. Hopefully they are based upon scientific study, rather than political, social, cultural or religious ideology.

The author, Amar Klar, (a geneticist who works in Frederick) states in the final sentence of the study summary, "These results suggest that sexual preference may be influenced in a significant proportion of homosexual men by a biological/genetic factor that also controls direction of hair-whorl rotation."

It's a very interesting paper, regardless what side you take on the debate of how individuals gain their sexual preference.

In 2002 Ivins wrote:

The Roman Catholic Church should learn from other equally worthy Christian denominations and eagerly welcome female clergy as well as married clergy.

And in 1999 he excoriated the "racial insensitivity, profanity and abuse" on rightwing talk radio shows that had recently been added to one of his local stations:

I tuned into WFMD's "John and Ken" program a few weeks ago. One of the hosts unashamedly used "G--d---" on the air, then a few moments later told a caller, "You talk like a black person!".

Click..

A few days later I tried WFMD's "Mike Gallagher" program. He referred to some of his listeners as "pinheads."

Click. Again..

Capstar owes a special apology to African-American residents of the area, and local businesses should seriously rethink their commitment to sponsoring racial insensitivity, profanity and abuse on WFMD.

As well, it's been reported that Ivins volunteered with the Red Cross and encouraged neighbors recycle their grass cuttings.

Given the similarities in the perceived political ideology among the targeted victims of the anthrax letters, the political affiliation or leanings of whoever was responsible for the attacks would seem key to the government's still-undisclosed case. Yet that aspect continues to be largely overlooked in the media coverage since Ivins' death.

Leahy: What I want to know --- I have a theory. But what I want to know is why me, why Tom Daschle, why Tom Brokaw?

VDB: Right. That all fits into the profile of a kind of hard-core and obviously insane ideologue on the far Right, somebody who would fixate on especially Tom Daschle, who at that point was the target of daily, vitriolic attacks on Right-wing talk radio.

Leahy: [Slowly, with a little shake of the head] I don't think it’s somebody insane. I'd accept everything else you said. But I don’t think it's somebody insane. And I think there are people within our government --- certainly from the source of it --- who know where it came from. [Taps the table to let that settle in] And these people may not have had anything to do with it, but they certainly know where it came from.

While Ivins' registration as a Democrat, originally filed as far back as 1982, doesn't necessarily mean he continued to hold the same political leanings today --- many voters who are registered, but who haven't moved, simply do not bother to change their party affiliation, even as their political beliefs morph over the years --- it's certainly another point of interest in an increasingly troubling case.

Kincaid, who conceded during our interview that the revelation of Ivins' party registration, in and of itself, was not necessarily "probative," still found it difficult to believe that someone as virulently rightwing as the author of the anthrax letters was believed to have been, would continue year in and year out to vote in Democratic primary elections.

Why it has taken the mainstream corporate media this long to ask and investigate similar questions about the political affiliation of Ivins, or even probe their many unnamed "government official" sources who have been feeding them reports, is just one more troubling mystery in the ever-growing mountain of troubling aspects in this story.

UPDATE: As promised, here is our hour-long interview today with Bob Kincaid, from his Head-On program, concerning the latest developments, issues and concerns in the anthrax case. Details concerning his findings on Bruce Ivins' Democratic Party registration in Maryland are discussed in the final 15 minutes or so of the hour.

UPDATE 8/5/08 12:30pm PT: A quick update. Reader RS notes that both of the targets of the anthrax letters in the Senate, Tom Daschle and Patrick Leahy, in addition to being Democrats like Ivins, are also both Roman Catholics, according to their Wikipedia pages. As Ivins was, by all accounts, a practicing Roman Catholic who volunteered for his local parish, (and as we've been informed by Catholic readers that suicide is a grave sin, punishable by eternal damnation, in the faith, and as Ivins, the meticulous scientist and prolific writer reportedly left no suicide note) the story just continues to grow curiouser and curiouser with each passing hour...

UPDATE 8/5/08 1:40pm PT: Just to close this loop. We called the Frederick County Board of Elections today, now that they are open for business again, and the Deputy Election Director Noreen Schultz, the same person who called Kincaid back yesterday, confirmed to us that in fact Ivins was a registered Democrat since 1982. She said they only have voting records going back to 1996 in their database, but that, yes, Ivins "was a very regular voter" who had voted in every election, including Democratic Primaries, since that date.

You know, Bob was likely expecting to find that the guy was a Republican. That would only have made sense. And he deserves major kudos for being honest enough to say what he found when it pointed to a member of our own party.

"CIFA's operations stirred concern among members of Congress and civil liberties advocates. A CIFA database known as Talon, set up to monitor threats against U.S. military installations, was found to have retained information on U.S. antiwar protesters including Quakers after they had been found to pose no security danger, officials said."

This sounds a little like "desperation" to me as we all know ending a government program is not a trivial task.

Additionally, if you saw a comment about anti-war protestors being spied on by government in this blog it would be "desperation" but since it is Reuters...it must be true...right?

"George Joulwan, a retired Army general who was the top NATO commander in Europe from 1993-97, said in an interview Friday that expecting soldiers to spend 15 months in Iraq is a major burden...There's a thin red line out there that you don't know when you cross it until after you've crossed it," Casey said. "We are now in a position of having to sustain an all-volunteer force in a protracted confrontation for the first time since the Revolutionary War, and so we are in uncharted territory. We're measuring all of these things very carefully, but I've got to tell you, it's a dicey game."

So I guess they are shortening the tours in Iraq so they can so those guys to Afghanistan.

If McCain is elected we WILL have a draft and then the real war will start with all of us that were dragged kicking and screaming into this thing and pay tax dollars to support what, in my book, can only be called "evil". The republicans have a wake up call coming, the deluge is upon them - this is what happens when you start a war that many of us do not want (and some of us never wanted). Vietnam will not die no matter how much they ridicule the 60s (i.e., those McCain ads)...republicans are slow learners which is why they hated the lesson of Vietnam (hmm, explains why they do not like "liberal" academia too).

I do not think the letters by Ivins in the Frederick News Post on their own are very illuminating on his political attitudes. Each of these letters is a response to either another letter or a news article and cannot be used for clues to Bruce Ivins state of mind without the previous text to which it is a response. Consider the letter from which the following quote comes.

Before dispensing such admonishments in the future, perhaps we should gratefully consider some of our country's most courageous, historical figures who refused to do so.

On its owen it may suggest Right Wing Christianism, but one cannot understand what point he is trying to make without access to the letter to which Uvins is responding.

...the doo doo is hitting the fan...
and today we find another peer reviewed published article that proves indeed there were explosives used in the 3 towers "collapsing" on 9/11read it and weep...and NY was covered in a toxic cloud of crap that rivals even the editing department at FOX news... it is only a matter of time before the entire charade opens up like a cheap bottle of Boons Farm
oh ye tenacious debunkers, how thy tongue is covered with the bitter oil of deceit; the mind is clouded with a jagged blue pill... where art thou now?

This man was not the one who did the crime he was a sick man who needed to be in a hospital. But since our Government messed up the case a long time ago this way they say quickly say this gay did it and act like they did their job. Look Americans believed the lie about who killed JFK, Dr. King and even the lie about WMDs and Mushroom Clouds so this lie is easy to pass off. It's so easy for the GOP today to trick Americans they could say chicken little the sky is falling and Americans would believe it.

My question is how did he commit suicide? Like Raymond Lemme committed 'suicide'? An administration that has the deaths of close to a million people on it's hands surely isn't above one more to prevent the truth from coming out.

There's new information that since the government held the patent on the anthrax vaccine that Ivins was working on, his financial benefit from it would have been small.
It's hard to imagine that the FBI could have picked a worse patsy; if anything, the information that's come out so far makes it clear that Ivins wasn't the person or persons who sent the anthrax. Who did? Well, who benefited from the anthrax attacks?

I guess if he had been a Republican, he would have been a standard issue child molester. Convienent, how dead men can't defend themselves. This one is being declared guilty, while the Republican Enron thief escaped guilt with death.

Carl Lee - slow down buddy. I don't think any of us BradBlog regulars, or Brad, actually believe that Ivins was the Anthrax killer. 2 + 2 does not = 5, which is what the government clearly wants us to believe.

I just watched Stone's JFK for the first time in about 10 years. The more things change the more they stay the same, right?

The only thing Brad is smoking is tobacco...and I hope one day he will stop that icky habit
as far as the "other" goes, he doesn't seem like the type (I may be wrong)
off topic but Blackwater has been stealing legal pot from Humbolt co. moonlighting for the DEA...

Yes, even though he's a heroin addict, chain smoker, retired KGB now freelancing for the NSA, just like me, he DID make it from the source to the mouth of the mighty D a couple weeks ago. And he NEVER smokes that funny stuff...

Wilber ~ Are you thinkin' what I'm thinkin' ... Ivins may have known something or someone he either should or shouldn't have, resulting in him being a loose end that had to be tied off before it was too late to do so . . .

Watching the Major Corporate Media conduct a trial by media is a spooky replay of the way Oswald --- after his death --- was tried in the press. It is quite a despicable formula that is the opposite of pursuit of Justice in a Court of Law:

To reach Justice in a Court of Law one does NOT need to prove the criminal MOTIVE of the accused; what is needed is hard evidence, presence at the crime scene, knowledge, participation, planning, witnesses and so on. (Motive plays a role when a lousy prosecutor wants to convict with only circumstantial evidence --- a situation that doesn't meet my personal definition of "Justice".)

But to complete a conviction in a Trial in the Press/Media, evidence plays NO part whatsoever; instead it is all about convincing the public that the accused was the type of person who had a motive to commit the crime at hand.

I say Ivins' RAPID demonization in the press as a 'lone gunman' is in itself proof of foul intent by the authorities. The anthrax investigation looks like no more than a seven-year slow-motion avoidance of any real crime-fighting effort. And now this Fall Guy Formula is being followed perfectly.

Recall also The Lone Gunman Story has been used to explain some of the most important political crimes in history (like the treatment of the dead Lee Harvey Oswald after the John F. Kennedy assassination, and even the treatment of the assassin of Archduke Ferdinand (this assassination was used as the pretext for initiating World War I).

The fact that Democrats and the press were the targets of the Anthrax Letters indicates this was a POLITICAL CRIME as much as a terrorist act.

www.freefromterror.net
Government by Anthrax
Who could have sent the anthrax letters and who has a motive? Here's evidence the letters were sent to grease the skids for the Patriot Act then before Congress.
By Richard J. Ochs

---

www.freefromterror.net/o...rticles/gov_anthrax.html
The glaring coincidence of the anthrax attacks with the passage of the Patriot Act can only be ignored as an elephant is ignored at a tea party. It is believable that this coincidence was overlooked in the fall of 2001 due to all the confusion, including letters to other places. In historical hindsight, the connection is obvious. It can be ignored now only as Germans ignored the death camps – the brazenness of the crime was unbelievable. Moreover, to admit the crime’s existence requires a courageous response. Timid souls may be tempted to stick their heads in the sand rather than do what is required to expose and root out criminals in high places, especially in time of war. The obvious response would be a Congressional investigation with no holds barred, even if it goes all the way to the top.

Does he honestly think that grasping for ludicrous straws such as this will tarnish the Democrats image?

HA!

IF anything, one could just as easily say "This delusional blogger is a registered Republican. So he must be a corrupt, lying, bigoted conservartive Christian asshole who screws around on his wife with gay prostitutes".

The above description seems to fit quite a lot of Republicans and/or Christians these days.

I am glad they found out who was behind the anthrax attacks, but the perpetrators political affiliation is as relevant as what kind of breakfast cereal he eats in the morning.

But of course, BRAD is too ignorant to understand such a basic concept.

I want to know when GWB is going to shame the congress into letting him preemptively invade with shock and awe Fort Detrick Maryland. Because it is obvious this home grown terrorist (it doesn't matter that he is dead Saddam is dead and we are still blowing up Iraq) and the "state" which harbored him should be taught a lesson by the strongest and most powerful nation in the world redeploy the Marines from Afghanistan because we now know where the real front line in on the war on terror it is in Maryland USA

Brad,I think the most deceptive phrase used by the government regarding Ivins culpability is "sole custodian". Reading several articles on the matter, I discovered that yes, this was a carefully constructed phrase to mislead the public. We are led to believe that Ivins had this little container he alone had the key for, when in fact, many people were allowed access to this genetic strain of anthrax. I wonder how the FBI could possibly eliminate all those suspects other than to use a phrase like "sole custodian" with the public. Words matter.

Tonight, the coverage kept touching on Catholicism and the fact that the targets of Ivin's attack were two "pro choice Catholics."

What was not mentioned was that there are millions of pro-choice Catholics, just as there are millions of Catholics who practice birth control and go against other prohibitions laid down by the Vatican. It's been that way for over 1000 years - We are a very selective group when it comes to following Vatican Doctrine.

The fact that Ivins was a registered Democrat and per BradBlog's reporting, made a habit of voting Democrat indicates to me that it is unlikely that he was staunchly "pro-life."

The government is admitting that the anthrax attacks were an inside job. They want us to believe that a lone scientist a week after 9/11 engaged in a complex criminal conspiracy all by himself. But the elephant in America's living room is why did White House staff, and President Bush as well, begin taking the powerful anti-anthrax antibiotic Cipro 7 days before the envelopes were mailed and nearly a month before anthrax was detected on Capitol Hill? How did they know that an anthrax bioterrorist attack was coming? Why were they were they profalactically treating themselves specifically for anthrax?

He may have been a registered Democrat but he certainly behaved like a Republican. According to evidence in the affidavit, Ivins harbored animosity towards Catholic politicians who were pro-choice such as Daschle and Leahy. There are reasons to remain skeptical of the FBI's case, but his voter's registration is NOT one of them.

This medication is used to treat a variety of bacterial infections. Ciprofloxacin belongs to a class of drugs called quinolone antibiotics. It works by stopping the growth of bacteria.

The rumors of the length of time before the attacks range from one day to a month, Jerome Hauer, the guy who was accused of putting administration personnel on it so fortuitously, vehemently denies having done so. I don't know what the origin of this bit is, but have heard it was the San Jose Mercury News, which has a good reputation. So I believe they were given Cipro prophylactically, but it could have been as a general precaution against biological agents, and it might not have been Jerome Hauer who did it.

While I feel strongly that both 9/11 and the anthrax attacks were inside jobs, I think we should try to be more accurate about this stuff.

The White House and George Bush were not profalactically treating themselves for urinary tract infections or infectious diarrhea. On July 28, 2000, the FDA's Anti-Infective Drug Products Advisory Committee unanimously recommended the approval of Cipro for inhalational anthrax (post-exposure) based on the available scientific data and consideration of the special circumstances surrounding the potential use of the drug.